Citations

Background. The impact of induction type or high-risk viral discordance on older kidney transplant recipients is unclear. Herein, we analyzed the association between induction type, viral discordance, and outcomes for older recipients. Methods. We analyzed the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients standard analysis file for all primary kidney transplant recipients older than 55 y who were transplanted between 2005 and 2022. All transplants were crossmatch negative and ABO-compatible. Recipients were discharged on tacrolimus and mycophenolate ± steroids. Recipients were categorized into 3 groups by induction received: rabbit antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG; N = 51 079), interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2RA; N = 22 752), and alemtuzumab (N = 13 465). Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for recipient and graft survival, and follow-up was censored at 10 y. Mixed-effect Cox proportional hazard models examined the association between induction type, high-risk viral discordance, and outcomes of interest. Models were adjusted for pertinent recipient and donor characteristics. Results. Induction type did not predict recipient survival in the multivariable model, whereas Epstein-Barr virus high-risk discordance predicted 14% higher mortality (1.14 [1.07-1.21], P < 0.01). In the multivariable model for death-censored graft survival, alemtuzumab, but not IL-2RA, was associated with an increased risk of graft loss (1.18 [1.06-1.29], P < 0.01) compared with r-ATG. High-risk cytomegalovirus discordance predicted 10% lower death-censored graft survival (1.10 [1.01-1.19], P < 0.02). Live donor and preemptive transplantation were favorable predictors of survival. Conclusions. In this large cohort of older transplant recipients, alemtuzumab, but not IL-2RA, induction was associated with an increased risk of graft loss compared with r-ATG. Cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus high-risk viral discordance portended poor graft and recipient survival, respectively.

ABSTRACTPerformance‐based measures of frailty are associated with healthcare utilization after kidney transplantation (KT) but require in‐person assessment. A promising alternative is self‐reported frailty. The goal of this study was to examine the ability of performance‐based and self‐reported frailty measures to predict 30‐day rehospitalizations after KT. We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study involving 272 adults undergoing KT at Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Florida, or Arizona. We simultaneously measured frailty before KT using the physical frailty phenotype (PFP), the short physical performance battery (SPPB), and self‐report (the Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] 4‐item physical function short form v2.0). Both the PFP and self‐reported frailty were independently associated with more than a 2‐fold greater odds of 30‐day rehospitalizations, while the SPPB was not. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the prognostic value of all three of the above frailty measures in patients undergoing KT. The PFP is more prognostic than the SPPB when assessing the risk of 30‐day rehospitalizations; self‐reported frailty can complement the PFP but not replace it. However, the 4‐item survey assessing self‐reported frailty represents a simple way to identify patients undergoing KT surgery who would benefit from interventions to lower the risk of rehospitalizations.

Key Points Morphometry allows for a more prognostic multidimensional quantification of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA) in kidneys than does visual inspection. The density of IFTA foci is determined by dividing the number of contiguous IFTA patches in the kidney cortex by the area of cortex. Higher density of IFTA foci significantly predicted renal allograft failure beyond %IFTA and other biopsy and clinical characteristics. Background Contraction of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA) may cause %IFTA to under-represent the severity of nephron loss. Higher density of IFTA foci is an important predictor of progressive CKD in native kidneys independent of %IFTA. Methods We studied kidney transplant recipients transplanted between 2000 and 2013 who had a 5-year surveillance kidney biopsy and subsequent follow-up. Banff ci score (interstitial fibrosis) was obtained from the pathology reports. After digitizing the biopsies, we traced cortex area and each distinct IFTA focus on a single trichrome-stained section. Percent IFTA area and IFTA foci density (count of IFTA foci/cortex area) were calculated. Cox models assessed the risk of death-censored graft failure after the 5-year biopsy with Banff ci score, morphometric %IFTA, and IFTA foci density. Results There were 58 death-censored allograft failures among 835 kidney recipients during the 5 years of follow-up. Biopsies from grafts that failed had higher mean Banff ci score (1.5 versus 0.7, P < 0.0001), %IFTA (22.6% versus 7.0%, P < 0.0001), and IFTA foci density (1.3/mm 2 versus 0.4/mm 2 , P < 0.0001). After adjusting for other Banff scores or clinical variables, Banff ci did not correlate with allograft failure, but both higher %IFTA (hazard ratio = 1.56, P < 0.0001) and higher IFTA foci density (hazard ratio = 2.34, P < 0.0001) did. All but four allograft failures by 10 years had biopsies in the top quartile of either %IFTA or IFTA foci density at 5 years. A model using just these two morphometric measures without clinical characteristics resulted in a c-statistic of 0.891 with respect to allograft failure. Conclusions Morphometric characterization of IFTA foci density is a strong predictor of death-censored allograft failure not captured in current Banff classification for grading of kidney fibrosis.

Objectives: Determine whether the timing of transplantation affects patient mortality. Background: Neoadjuvant therapy and liver transplantation have emerged as an excellent treatment option for select patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). However, the optimal timing of transplantation is not known. Methods: We reviewed all patients registered for a standardized pCCA protocol between 1996 and 2020 at our center. After adjusting for confounders, we examined the association of waiting time with patient mortality in an intention-to-treat cohort (n=392) and those who received a liver transplant (n=256). Results: The median (interquartile range) time from registration to transplant or dropout was 5.74 (3.25–7.06) months. Compared with a short wait time (0–3 mo), longer waiting times did not affect all-cause mortality: (3–6 mo) hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% CI: 0.52–1.84; (6–9 mo) HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.39–1.65; (9–12 mo) HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.26–1.22. Subgroups with a shorter waiting time had similar survival to those with long waiting times: living donor available HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.67–1.42; AB or B blood group HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.62–1.39. Longer waiting times were associated with decreased all-cause mortality after transplantation (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87–0.97). This benefit began after a 6-month waiting time minimum (HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.26–1.10) and increased further after 9 months (HR: 0.43 95% CI: 0.20–0.93). Waiting time was not associated with residual adenocarcinoma in the explant (odds ratio 0.99; 95% CI: 0.98–1.00). Conclusions: A waiting time of at least 6 months will optimize results with transplantation without affecting overall (intention-to-treat) patient survival.